New Ask Claude or ChatGPT about any stock, using Bullpen. Bullpen in Claude or ChatGPT. 7 days free
Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Friday, November 13, 2026

Back to the front page

Industry Primer: Alternative Asset Managers

Alternative asset managers earn durable fees on committed capital, but 2026 losses followed retail-credit redemptions, lender-fraud allegations and AI fears around portfolio software…

BN $94B
Latticework by MOI Global 2 clicks

From X

@aleabitoreddit

Serenity on X

I found the technical discussion helpful, but investor messaging to be way too conservative. If you look at how $NVDA CEO describes CPO, Jensen states scale up is increasing optical volumes by 15x. $LITE and $COHR are quantifying that by describing $5-$20B agreements spanning 3-5 years out. Having this question, and not talking about Ayar, O-Net, Poet, or ELS partnerships. Then redirecting the question to near term pluggables seems off. The vision also needs work, “communications and sensing” semi company is very unexciting. It’s technically true, but there’s no vision being communicated on being the next $40B optical giant or what Sivers is going to be in the next 5 years that would attract long term holders. The core valuation Sivers gets is from optical opportunities, I also personally disagree that it’s helpful to loop back to former cellular relationships when talking about future $GFS volumes I disagree when you portray the company as “small” when Sivers 100m CW DFB capacity is coming online, alongside large foundry partners. Which is a material % of the world’s annual laser capacity. Investors want to hear about future economic opportunities and how you fill the gap with more qualifications during a bottleneck. Sivers has a tremendous opportunity for CPO/NPO/Pluggables but I’m afraid it’s not being communicated properly. It’s understandable here since EETimes is more technical oriented, but I hope this messaging gets communicated better in the next earnings call.
@convequity

Convequity on X

Marvell buying Lumentum is easier to understand strategically than financially. Four days after $MRVL announced its all-stock acquisition of $LITE, I understand why both sides want it. I remain unconvinced by the shareholder economics at the announced $115bn enterprise value. Smart bulls long $LITE after mid-2026 for its UHP CW story, but we don't. Lumentum's ultra-high-power laser advantage depends on the optical architecture customers choose. Moving the light source closer to the optical engine can reduce losses and change the power required. Today's component bottleneck may become less valuable as the system design changes. External lasers still offer cooling and replacement advantages. Broadcom $AVGO uses them too; its strength is coordinating switch silicon, optical engines and packaging. Huawei's Hi-ONE takes a different route with a built-in light source. Both reinforce the importance of controlling the broader design. That helps explain Marvell's motivation. In AI clusters, weaker networking can leave expensive accelerators idle. A cheaper networking component may never compensate for the lost compute. Buying Lumentum gives Marvell more control over the optical technology it needs to compete. But shareholders have to fund that integration. Marvell holders exchange roughly one-third of the combined company for Lumentum. Lumentum holders receive a fixed number of Marvell shares, leaving them exposed to Marvell's share price and the combined company's execution. We have always being negative on $MRVL vs. $AVGO. Always a tier 2 mgt in both vision and execution. The expected first-half-2028 close is a nightmare for a catch-up strategy. Both companies can keep developing products, but the benefits of combined ownership remain deferred. Broadcom and Huawei have time to advance their designs and deepen customer deployments. By closing, the competitive gap could be wider. I would assign no value to an NVIDIA $NVDA rescue. NVIDIA already has investments and partnerships with both companies. It can access their technology without acquiring the business; a takeover would still depend on price and regulatory clearance. The strategic rationale is understandable. The shareholder case needs customer wins and earnings that justify the ownership exchanged, integration costs and time lost. I remain skeptical.

Investor Letters

All letters

Top Rebound Stocks for Nov’26

Texas Pacific Land's 50% selloff reflects faded data-center expectations, while its Permian royalty business generated $498 million of 2025…

TPL $19B
Rebound Capital 2 clicks

DoorDash’s FBA Moment

DoorDash’s $17 billion Instacart deal targets DashMart warehouse scale, where 99%+ order accuracy and faster delivery address the limits of…

DASH $78BKR $41B
MBI Deep Dives 3 clicks

Sea Ltd Earnings Update: Q3 2026

Sea Ltd reported Q3 2026 revenue of $8.6 billion, up 43.4% year over year, while net income rose 34.0%.

SE $45B
SixSigmaCapital: Navigating the Financial Markets 7 clicks

Monte Investments Market Brief Vol. CXXXV

Quanta Services’ backlog rose 63% year over year to $64 billion as shares fell 30%, while AI power and data-center construction demand…

PWR $92B
Monte Independent Investment Research 2 clicks

No title

SpaceX’s $24 billion Starbase power plant, Microsoft’s Oracle capacity cuts, Riot’s $72 billion AI lease and Quanta’s sell-off frame…

PWR $92B
Monte Independent Investment Research 3 clicks

Insider activity October 2026

Asian insider buying reached $2.9 billion in October, the highest since 2018, with South Korea and Thailand leading.

BKRKY $23B
Asian Century Stocks 2 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

130 publications

Newsletters 110

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 84 of 288

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

91 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

376 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.